Objectives/Goals: Conduct an evaluation of the Clinical Research Support Center (CRSC) model using a structured methodology, leverage insights to drive continuous improvement and evolution, and broadly disseminate outcomes to promote knowledge sharing and best practices for similar translational science initiatives. Methods/Study Population: We will utilize a structured case study approach, including adapting a translational science case study evaluation approach to assess impact as well as support practices, barriers, and facilitators that influence research translation. We will collect data from diverse sources. Primary data will come from structured interviews with stakeholders and a survey of a random sample of faculty and research staff. Secondary data includes grant applications, reports, and publications; public stories/media related to research supported by CRSC; scientific publications; and organizational documents. Results/Anticipated Results: The case study will identify the CRSC model’s impact on the research enterprise. Findings will articulate the specific strategies and practices the CRSC implemented to support clinical research; key factors, people, and resources that helped develop, improve, and promote CRSC services; significant milestones in evolution of the CRSC; and specific ways in which support services impact clinical research infrastructure and outcomes. The findings will highlight both strengths and areas for improvement. Early results show historical challenges with operational silos and resource limitations. Findings suggest CRSC facilitators include a team science approach with institutional support. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This case study will provide insights related to benefits, challenges, and facilitators of a translational science support model. Insights will guide the CRSC’s evolution and be broadly disseminated to promote knowledge sharing and best practices for future translational science applications.

It is important for the research produced by industrial-organizational (I-O) psychologists to be rigorous, relevant, and useful to organizations. However, I-O psychology research is often not used in practice. In this paper, we (both practitioners and academics) argue that engaged scholarship—a particular method of inclusive, collaborative research that incorporates multiple stakeholder perspectives throughout the research process—can help reduce this academic–practice gap and advance the impact of I-O psychology. To examine the current state of the field, we reviewed empirical evidence of the current prevalence of collaborative research by examining the number of articles that contain nonacademic authors across 14 key I-O psychology journals from 2018 to 2023. We then build on these findings by describing how engaged scholarship can be integrated throughout the research process and conclude with a call to action for I-O psychologists to conduct more collaborative research. Overall, our goal is to facilitate a fruitful conversation about the value of collaborative research that incorporates multiple stakeholder perspectives throughout the research process in hopes of reducing the academic–practice gap. We also aim to inspire action in the field to maintain and enhance the impact of I-O psychology on the future world of work.

Scholarly activity is a key component of most residency programmes. To establish fundamental research skills and fill gaps within training curricula, we developed an online, asynchronous set of modules called Research 101 to introduce trainees to various topics that are germane to the conduct of research and evaluated its effectiveness in resident research education. Research 101 was utilised by residents at One Brooklyn Health in Brooklyn, NY. Resident knowledge, confidence, and satisfaction were assessed using pre- and post-module surveys with 5-point Likert scaled questions, open-ended text responses, and a multiple-choice quiz. Pre-module survey results indicated that residents were most confident with the Aligning expectations, Introduction to research, and Study design and data analysis basics modules and least confident with the Submitting an Institutional Review Board protocol and Presenting your summer research modules. Post-module survey responses demonstrated increased learning compared to pre-module results for all modules and learning objectives (p < 0.0001). “This module met my needs” was endorsed 91.4% of the time. The median score for the final quiz that consisted of 25 multiple-choice questions was 23. Thematic analysis of open-ended post-module survey responses identified multiple strengths and opportunities for improvement in course content and instructional methods. These data demonstrate that residents benefit from completion of Research 101, as post-module survey scores were significantly higher than pre-module survey scores for all modules and questions, final quiz scores were high, and open-ended responses highlighted opportunities for additional resident learning.

The COVID-19 pandemic destabilised the political, social, and economic life of countries as it spread around the world. It posed multiple threats to individuals, societies, and across different domains of life, highlighting their intersectionality and uneven impacts. The paper focuses on the UK and South Korea, countries which took very different paths in framing and addressing the crisis. It draws on secondary data and an integrated critical human security and state capacity approach to compare how state responses, institutional capacity, and the mobilisation of policy instruments themselves construct constellations of insecurity which intersect with human security and vulnerability. It will demonstrate the structural constraints that have continued to shape vulnerability and the dynamics of human security and insecurity in turbulent times.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Scholarly activity is a key component of most residency programs. To establish fundamental research skills and fill gaps within training curricula, we developed an online, asynchronous set of modules to introduce trainees to various topics that are germane to the conduct of research and evaluated its effectiveness in resident research education. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Research 101 was utilized by residents at the Brookdale Hospital Medical Center in Brooklyn, NY. Resident knowledge, confidence, and satisfaction were assessed using pre- and post-module surveys with 5-point Likert scaled questions, open-ended text responses, and a final quiz. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Pre-module survey results indicated that residents were most confident with the Aligning expectations, Introduction to research, and Study design and data analysis basics modules and least confident with the Submitting an Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocol at UC and Presenting your summer research modules. Post-module survey responses increased significantly compared to pre-module results for all modules and learning objectives (p<0.0001). “This module met my needs” was endorsed 91.4% of the time. A final quiz of 25 multiple choice questions resulted in a median score of 23. Content analysis of open-ended post-module survey responses identified multiple strengths and opportunities for improvement in course content and instructional methods. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: These data demonstratethat residents can benefit from completion of Research 101, as post-module survey scores were significantly higher than pre-module survey scores for all modules and questions, and final quiz scores were high and highlighted opportunities for additional resident learning.

Background: Previously, our hospital manually built a static antibiogram from a surveillance system (VigiLanz) culture report. In 2019, a collaboration between the antimicrobial stewardship team (AST) and the infection control (IC) team set out to leverage data automation to create a dynamic antibiogram. The goal for the antibiogram was the ability to easily distribute and update for hospital staff, with the added ability to perform advanced tracking and surveillance of organism and drug susceptibilities for AST and IC. By having a readily available, accurate, and Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI)–compliant antibiogram, clinicians have the best available data on which to base their empiric antibiotic decisions. Methods: First, assessment of required access to hospital databases and selection of a visualization software (MS Power BI) was performed. Connecting SQL database feeds to Power BI enabled creation of a data model using DAX and M code to comply with the CLSI, generating the first isolate per patient per year. Once a visual antibiogram was created, it was validated against compiled antibiograms using data from the microbiology laboratory middleware (bioMerieux, Observa Integrated Data Management Software). This validation process uncovered some discrepancies between the 2 reference reports due to cascade reporting of susceptibilities. The Observa-derived data were used as the source of truth. The antibiogram prototype was presented to AST/IC members, microbiology laboratory leadership, and other stakeholders to assess functionality. Results: Following feedback and revisions by stakeholders, the new antibiogram was published on a hospital-wide digital platform (Fig. 1). Clinicians may view the antibiogram at any time on desktops from a firewall (or password)–protected intranet. The antibiogram view defaults to the current calendar year and users may interact with the antibiogram rows and columns without disrupting the integrity of the background databases or codes. Each year, simple refreshing of the Power BI antibiogram and changing of the calendar year allows us to easily and accurately update the antibiogram on the hospital-wide digital platform. Conclusions: This interdisciplinary collaboration resulted in a new dynamic, CLSI-compliant antibiogram with improved usability, increased visibility, and straightforward updating. In the future, a mobile version of the antibiogram may further enhance accessibility, bring more useful information to providers, and optimize AST/IC guidelines and education.

Disclosures: None

Background: The off-target effects linezolid have the potential to cause serotonin syndrome when given in conjunction with serotonergic agents. Despite package insert labeling as a contraindication, several postmarketing studies have demonstrated a low incidence of serotonin syndrome with the concomitant use of linezolid and other serotonergic agents. Linezolid provides a convenient oral option for gram-positive infections. However, due to concerns for serotonin syndrome, the use of linezolid is sometimes avoided. Methods: We performed a single-center, retrospective, medical record review of all adult inpatients from September 2021 to September 2022. Patients included had 1 administration of linezolid and 1 inpatient administration of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) within 14 days. The primary outcome was the incidence of serotonin syndrome as defined by the Hunter serotonin toxicity criteria, which were retrospectively applied to each patient based on medical-record documentation. We compared patients receiving 1 versus multiple serotonergic agents. Secondary outcomes included duration of hospitalization and adverse outcomes based on concerns for serotonin syndrome such as need for rescue, ICU admission, or change in medication. Results: Of the 50 included patients from a convenience sample, 27 (54%) were on linezolid and >1 serotonergic agent. Patients had similar baseline characteristics (Table 1). The most common concomitant agent used was an SSRI. Other agents that predispose patients to serotonin syndrome included opioid analgesics and other classes of antidepressants (Fig. 1). Serotonin syndrome occurred within 48 hours in 1 patient on an SNRI and a continuous fentanyl drip. There was no need for rescue or ICU admission due to serotonin syndrome. No patients were readmitted due to serotonin syndrome, and no differences were observed in hospital lengths of stay. Conclusions: Exposure to a single serotonergic agent combined with receipt of linezolid was not associated with any cases of serotonin syndrome. Exposure to multiple serotonergic agents was not associated with a high incidence of serotonin syndrome. This small series supports previous reports demonstrating relative safety of linezolid given with serotonergic agents and encourages review of interruptive drug–drug interaction alerts for linezolid within the electronic ordering system.

Disclosures: None

Background: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir received emergency use authorization (EUA) for the prevention of progression of COVID-19 in December 2021. Most data supporting this authorization are limited to the outpatient setting in unvaccinated patients, and high-quality head-to-head comparisons to other antivirals such as remdesivir are lacking. Patients at high risk of disease progression, such as advanced age, smokers, and those with cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, or cancer continue to be admitted to acute-care settings for various indications, and some are incidentally found to have mild COVID-19. The objective of this project was to compare rates of progression of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 for inpatients treated with remdesivir versus nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. Methods: This study was a single-center, retrospective cohort study that included patients aged ≥18 years with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who were initiated on nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within 5 days or remdesivir within 7 days of symptom onset between June 2022 and August 2022. The primary outcome was the worsening of symptoms via the WHO ordinal clinical severity scale for COVID-19. Secondary outcomes included escalation of care or readmission due to COVID-19, discharge prior to treatment completion, and any adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Within our institutional guidelines, prior approval is needed for COVID-19 treatment through collaboration between the primary team and antimicrobial stewards. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is the preferred agent for both in- and outpatients unless the patient had drug interactions or lack of enteral access, in which case remdesivir was considered. Results: In total, 58 patients were screened and 50 patients were included, 25 patients in each arm. Most were non-Hispanic, white males with at least 1 comorbidity. Compared to the remdesivir arm, the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir arm had more patients with at least a primary COVID-19 vaccine (44% vs 34%). Also, 88% of patients in each arm had a baseline ordinal score of 4, and 12% had a score of 5. Ordinal score changes between the start and end of therapy were similar between groups, and neither had an increase in oxygen requirements (Fig. 1). No readmissions were due to COVID-19, and both medications were well tolerated. Refer to Fig. 2 for secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and remdesivir showed similar safety and efficacy in the treatment of hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Current evidence-based guidelines and treatment costs favor nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for patients who can receive this drug.

Disclosures: None

This longitudinal study aimed to validate the biosocial theory of borderline personality disorder (BPD) by examining the transactional relationship between individual vulnerabilities and parental invalidation, and their links to BPD symptoms. We recruited a sample of 332 adolescents (mean age = 14.18 years; 58.3% female) residing in Singapore and administered self-report measures across three time-points (six months apart). Results from our path analytic model indicated that parental invalidation, impulsivity, and emotional vulnerability exhibited unique predictive associations with emotion dysregulation six months later. There was also a reciprocal prospective relationship between emotion regulation difficulties and BPD symptoms. Using random-intercepts cross-lagged panel models, we found partial evidence for a within-individual reciprocal relationship between parental invalidation and emotional vulnerability, and a unidirectional relationship of within-individual changes in impulsivity positively predicting changes in parental invalidation six months later. Overall, the study provided partial empirical support for the biosocial model in a Singaporean context.

The putative host galaxy of FRB 20171020A was first identified as ESO 601-G036 in 2018, but as no repeat bursts have been detected, direct confirmation of the host remains elusive. In light of recent developments in the field, we re-examine this host and determine a new association confidence level of 98%. At 37 Mpc, this makes ESO 601-G036 the third closest FRB host galaxy to be identified to date and the closest to host an apparently non-repeating FRB (with an estimated repetition rate limit of $<$$0.011$ bursts per day above $10^{39}$ erg). Due to its close distance, we are able to perform detailed multi-wavelength analysis on the ESO 601-G036 system. Follow-up observations confirm ESO 601-G036 to be a typical star-forming galaxy with H i and stellar masses of $\log_{10}\!(M_{\rm{H\,{\small I}}} / M_\odot) \sim 9.2$ and $\log_{10}\!(M_\star / M_\odot) = 8.64^{+0.03}_{-0.15}$, and a star formation rate of $\text{SFR} = 0.09 \pm 0.01\,{\rm M}_\odot\,\text{yr}^{-1}$. We detect, for the first time, a diffuse gaseous tail ($\log_{10}\!(M_{\rm{H\,{\small I}}} / M_\odot) \sim 8.3$) extending to the south-west that suggests recent interactions, likely with the confirmed nearby companion ESO 601-G037. ESO 601-G037 is a stellar shred located to the south of ESO 601-G036 that has an arc-like morphology, is about an order of magnitude less massive, and has a lower gas metallicity that is indicative of a younger stellar population. The properties of the ESO 601-G036 system indicate an ongoing minor merger event, which is affecting the overall gaseous component of the system and the stars within ESO 601-G037. Such activity is consistent with current FRB progenitor models involving magnetars and the signs of recent interactions in other nearby FRB host galaxies.

There are many ways to measure how people manage risk when they make decisions. A standard approach is to measure risk propensity using self-report questionnaires. An alternative approach is to use decision-making tasks that involve risk and uncertainty, and apply cognitive models of task behavior to infer parameters that measure people’s risk propensity. We report the results of a within-participants experiment that used three questionnaires and four decision-making tasks. The questionnaires are the Risk Propensity Scale, the Risk Taking Index, and the Domain Specific Risk Taking Scale. The decision-making tasks are the Balloon Analogue Risk Task, the preferential choice gambling task, the optimal stopping problem, and the bandit problem. We analyze the relationships between the risk measures and cognitive parameters using Bayesian inferences about the patterns of correlation, and using a novel cognitive latent variable modeling approach. The results show that people’s risk propensity is generally consistent within different conditions for each of the decision-making tasks. There is, however, little evidence that the way people manage risk generalizes across the tasks, or that it corresponds to the questionnaire measures.

We provide evidence of a network of information flow between activists and other investors prior to 13D filings. We match EDGAR search activity to investor IP addresses, identifying specific investors who persistently download information on an individual activist’s campaign targets in the days prior to that activist’s 13D disclosures. This outside investor’s knowledge of pending activist campaign plans seems to benefit both parties: the informed investor, unnamed in the 13D, increases its holdings in the targeted stock prior to the price surge upon 13D disclosure, while the activist earns voting support that increases their likelihood of pursuing and winning a proxy fight.